Posted on February 21, 2013 by Tony Heller

About Tony Heller

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to

  1. Andy Oz says:
    February 21, 2013 at 11:32 am

    If that is really true, then it’s game over. No wonder NASA wants to shut it down, because they’ve lost their space money, and now they’d lose their climate change money. And the good doctor’s theory makes a lot more sense than the other crap coming out on Catastrophic AGW.

    Reply
  2. gator69 says:
    February 21, 2013 at 1:12 pm

    I have always maintained that there are balancing mechanisms that keep runaway warming from occurring, and Dr Miskolczi’s work fits well with my view of how our planet operates. It will be interesting to see what both sides have to say.

    Reply
  3. harrydhuffman (@harrydhuffman) says:
    February 21, 2013 at 1:20 pm

    That Climate Truth article is two and a half years old. I left the following comment there just now:

    “The simplest definitive evidence against the existence of the consensus “greenhouse effect” is my Venus/Earth atmospheric temperatures comparison, which simply shows that the temperature ratio, at points of equal pressure and over the full range of Earth tropospheric pressures, is a constant due only to the ratio of the two planets’ distances from the Sun, according to the most basic physics, and nothing else. Venus has over 2400 times the atmospheric CO2 concentration of Earth, yet that huge difference has no effect upon the Venus temperatures whatsoever.”

    Reply
  4. kirkmyers says:
    February 21, 2013 at 8:00 pm

    Yes, the article is dated, but nonetheless a good synopsis of Dr. Miskolczi’s groundbreaking work. I plan in the near future to interview him for a follow-up article. By the way, NASA did not want to address Miskolczi’s remarks, but instead directed me to a PR spokesperson.

    Kirk Myers

    Reply
  5. Eric Simpson says:
    February 21, 2013 at 8:38 pm

    Good blog interview, Kirk. From your blog and Dr. Miskolczi’s 2009 letter to the EPA: “the infrared absorbing capability of the atmosphere has not been changed; therefore, the greenhouse effect can not be the cause of the global warming.” To simplify, could one say that theoretical models are correct that contend that there is no effective GHE after 200ppm?
    And another point I make, as on wuwt yesterday:

    CO2 may have a meager effect, or NO effect. And with the evidence as it is (temperature changes causes changes in CO2 levels, with no evidence of CO2 causing temperature changes), the warmists now maintain that CO2 is both a cause and an effect of temperature change. So, if CO2 were to have anything more than a meager effect, there would be a runaway greenhouse effect, no question. As temps rose, more CO2 would come out of the oceans, causing temps to rise, causing more CO2, etc. Temps would rise until the oceans boiled. But in the past CO2 was as high as 7100ppm, and there was no runaway greenhouse effect. It seems logical that the only possibilities is that CO2 has a meager (inconsequential) or no effect.

    Reply

Leave a Reply